Tag Archives: Team Building

Who wants to change the world (and make some serious cash doing it)?

I have the concept and the knowledge… I need a small team who want to change the world.

I really want to develop a new Personality Type testing system, more advanced than the standard MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). There is so much useful information scattered about the internet, it’s just that you have to look in a million different places and put the pieces together yourself.

As an ENTP, I’m super excited about this challenge and am very knowledgeable about the subject. I’ve even studied up on Socionics, which is like twice as complicated as the MBTI.

I want to build the test, and then make a website, perhaps even an app that:

Allows you to take a real test, and then has detailed, complete information about your type. I’m also wanting to go as far as inter type relations (how your type interacts with other types).

I need a few people that can help me out. As an ENTP, I’m a natural collaborator and brainstormer. If I try to complete the project by myself, it’ll honestly never happen.

I think if we could build an app for iOS and Android, we could perhaps even turn this whole thing into a startup company. I met a gentleman yesterday who has a ton of money, and is looking for a creative way to invest it. For example, he’s in the process of buying 85 used houses, remodeling them, and then flipping them for profit. So, he’s got serious cash.

Not only that, but we could include in the app various types of feedback to find out what kind of music they like, what hobbies they are into, where they work. We could use that data to create a quantified self, and I think we could sell that data for big bucks.

This is the future, ladies and gentleman…

But, I absolutely need a few good people to help me with this.

Please let me know if you would be interested in developing this project with me. Anyone who gets involved in the pre-investment stage would be made a part owner of the business. We could actually make some serious cash here, guys.

I have a couple job interviews in the next few weeks, but if this would absolutely be my first choice if we could work it out. We could be the team, the originals, the Mark Zuckerbergs and Shawn Parkers… the Steve Jobs and whoever the hell he worked with. We would be in control and in it from the beginning.

People love this Personality Type stuff, and I know that we can do it much better.

MBTI breakdown for Men and Women

Cognitive Information Functions

MBTI Chart

Socionics-based Inter Type Relations Chart

Socionics Chart for the Different Types.

They have different terminologies, for example an ENTP is an ILE in Socionics (It stands for Logical Intuitive Extrovert). Logical being the Thinking functions, Intuitive being the Intuitive Function, and Extrovert for Extrovert. The reason there is only 3 letters vs 4 is because of the order they are placed in. They don’t need a J or a P at the end to identify the type, it goes by what order the letters are in.

What the Hell are Those Symbols?

Each of those symbols represents a different cognitive function. The triangle is Intuition, the circle is Sensing, the square is Logic (Thinking), and the L-shaped thing is Ethics (Feeling). The Dark ones represent extraverted functions, and the White ones represent introverted functions.

Duality in Socionics

One of the strongest variations from MBTI is the belief in “Duals.” These are two different personality types that compliment each others’ strengths and lessen their weaknesses. It is said that “Duals” are IDEAL companions / mates, as they together form an almost Yin-Yang like full entity.

The Dual Functions:

Cognitive / Information Functions and their Interaction with Each Other.

They compliment / contradict each other, according to socionics. It’s a brilliant philosophy, but it was abandoned by the inventor of the system (who came from Soviet Russia) several years ago. Nobody has taken up the reigns to fully flesh out the system and simplify it for the regular non-sociologist. THAT is the objective of the startup.

Socionics is a branch of psychology that studies relationships between psychological types.

It is based on somewhat modified system of psychological types described by C.G.Jung in his Psychological Types (1916, 1920 etc.) and Tavistock Lectures (1935).

You also know a different version of Jungian typology known as the Myers-Briggs Type Theory (MBTT). It is based on the test called Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). It is well known in the US, and for the last years in Europe as well.

The Myers-Briggs Type Theory is sometimes confused with socionics, although there are some differences between these two theories. Let us describe them shortly:

Different methods of type evaluation. MBTT almost completely relies upon tests, while socionics from the beginning developed alternative methods – determining type by interviewing, observation, etc. Verbal testing is considered as a secondary, not primary method, because it says nothing about the nature of types. This does not mean that tests are not known in socionics. For example we the authors of this article developed the Socionic Multifactor Test, which we are going to discuss below. In the last years socionics focuses on biological parameters of types.

Somewhat different definitions of the 4 basic type criteria. In MBTT, the type is defined as 4 basic choices: extraversion (E) or introversion (I), sensing (S) or intuition (N), thinking (T) or feeling (F), judgment (J) or perception (P). Socionics uses terms logic/ethic – instead of thinking/feeling, and rationality/irrationality – instead of perception/judgment. However, more important is the contents of these definitions, they do not always coincide.

Intertype relationships. Although several representatives of MBTT proposed their own views on compatibility between the Myers-Briggs types, a thorough theory of intertype relationships does not exist in MBTT. By contrast, Socionics, from the very beginning, was created as a theory describing and explaining some regularities of relations between people.

On the other hand, there is also a lot in common between these two theories. Main fields of application are the same: family and business consulting, education etc. When first publications about MBTT appeared in the former USSR (a very short overview appeared in 1984, and several popular books were translated since 1994), socionists found a lot of useful information there. We believe in fruitful cooperation between these two branches of Jungian typology is possible; we should not forget about the differences, but we believe they can be resolved.

Here are some links that go into depth more about the way the functions interact with each other (and it goes into much more detail about socionics:

I know it’s a little tricky and complex, but that’s the point. We make it simple and user-friendly and we disrupt society.

Creating the idea problem solving / future trends team is pretty simple. In fact, simplicity is an important aspect of success. Understanding these basic principles, can differentiate between a game-changer or complete bust.

Size Matters

With a future focused, problem forecasting, and solution creation team, you can’t have too many open minds at the same time. The ideal size is a minimum of three and a maximum of five team members.The people involved will all have the same goal of future problem solving, but by having too many divergent ideas in the same room, an unorganized, directionless discussion will develop quite quickly. So keep the team 3-5, and you’ll be in a great place.

Personality Matters

Let us pretend when have a three person team. The personality type of each person greatly changes the social dynamics of the group. It’s extremely important that all team members share the same overall goal, which is to solve a huge problem and to build a better future. However, it is equally important for a diversity of personality types.

Live in the world of possibilities, and become excited about concepts, challenges and difficulties.

When presented with a problem, they’re good at improvising and quickly come up with a creative solution.

Creative, clever, curious, and theoretical.

2. The Strategist

Capable of turning the big ideas or concepts and breaking them down into a workable plan.

Ability to challenge the Visionary, while still remaining a respect for them.

They aren’t the best at coming up with the ideas, but they quickly become enthusiastic.

Once they fully comprehend the idea, they are fantastic at working out possible plans to carry out the ideas.

3. The Duty Fulfiller

Serious and quiet, interested in security and peaceful living.

Extremely thorough, responsible, and dependable.

Well-developed powers of concentration.

Usually interested in supporting and promoting traditions and establishments.

Well-organized and hard-working, they work steadily towards identified goals.

They can usually carry out any task once they have set their mind to it.

Have tremendous respect for facts.

Shake It Up

This is merely one example of a group with diversity, there are many ways you can try alternate teams, keeping a focus on making a team that’s diverse and have contrasting strengths and weaknesses. By keeping the team diverse, you create and environment of “accidental collaboration,” The opposing forces triggers a stronger team with a bigger potential.

There are endless possibilities to try out, and I strongly recommend that you experiment a while to see what works best for you.

The Beatles

Each member possessed different personality type, which made them stronger together than they could ever be by themselves.

John was a visionary, abstract thinker, with a great deal of imaginary. However, he was not great at turning these ideas into the finished product. It a contrast of future thinking, and a propensity for randomness, adventure, doing whatever felt good at the moment. As a result, he wasn’t strong at getting his song concepts into a polished, organized, consistent product.

Paul was great at turning big ideas and creating ways to make them.

He loved the imaginative, big vision, but go his greatest pleasure from working out the instrumentation and details of the final songs.

George was an introverted person. He was very insightful, relaxed, and much more spiritual. He also shared in the big vision, but his primary focus came from throwing in a beneficial part here and there.

As a team member, George served as a balance to John and Paul’s aggressive, extroverted, and controlling personalities. George didn’t crave or care about control.

Ringo was great at route detail, consistency, and execution of the finished product.

It didn’t upset him that he would not start the project, bur he found his enjoyment from carrying it out.

Archives

Search

In in instant, both people would immediately not just know every thought and action each other has ever had. They would actually have experienced it (as far as they know).

Now, imagine that same technology scaled large enough to “sync” every single person on the planet, for 60 seconds.

Instant Global Awakening.

For geeks, think of:

Telepathy (aka Professor X).

Vulcan Mind Meld.

It’s the same thing, but instead of cool but impossible magic powers (Trust me that would be “Plan A,” but my extensive research of trying to grab the remote control using “The Force,” isn’t looking very promising at the moment.

However, we can invent… and as impossible as this idea sounds, it could be done, with immense R&D, a bottomless pit of money, and a lifetime.

Most (or all) of the people starting the project would never live to see the result, but it would give your life purpose. We’d be building heaven, but never get to go…

What about our kids?

…and theirs?

Randomly thought of that… the same effect is happening with the gradual extinction of privacy, and our ability to instantly communicate.

It’d still be faster, but then you run into:

Is it wrong to force everyone to do something once, if it means putting an end to so much pain? Who gets to make that decision?